<html><head><meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8"></head><body dir="auto"><div>He also did say in Baku, as I recall, that "the internet and governance were oxymorons, and there was a need for a collaborative, inclusive [etc] process"</div><div><br></div><div>Sender pays regimes are present across multiple country submissions, including at least some language I think I noticed that makes them mandatory without the possibility of optout, should a country (or rather, most of the OECD economies) choose to step away from the ITRs and/or refuse to ratify certain sections as amended.<br><br>--srs (iPad)</div><div><br>On 05-Dec-2012, at 20:03, parminder <<a href="mailto:parminder@itforchange.net">parminder@itforchange.net</a>> wrote:<br><br></div><blockquote type="cite"><div>
<meta content="text/html; charset=UTF-8" http-equiv="Content-Type">
<br>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On Tuesday 04 December 2012 11:24 PM,
Suresh Ramasubramanian wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote cite="mid:D2298F15-344A-4F26-8F91-C54F81A0007E@hserus.net" type="cite">
<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
<div>Tis, after minister Sibal held a bunch of multistakeholder
consultations, and then blandly said that while there was no
time to submit changed documents, India's viewpoints at WCIT
would not let the ITU be involved in igov,</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
The minister said no such thing. He said that it is certainly not
India's intention that ITU gets into content regulation, and if
there is any misconception about it coming from the existing
language they are ready to amend it to that extent.<br>
<br>
I inter alia suggested at the meeting with the minister that
language promoting freedom of expression be proposed for the
preamble to the ITRs, and promised to provide such language. The
enclosed was submitted to the minister's office a few days back....<br>
<br>
As the enclosed submission suggests, we remain rather concerned that
while ENTO like specific proposals will surely not go through, some
more cleverly and lightly put language, as we saw in the Indian
proposal, that opens the door for a 'sender pays' regime in the
future, may still get in.<br>
<br>
<i><b> It is our view that the greatest loss coming from the WCIT
and new ITRs could such kind of language that is not very
specific, but suggests the possibility of a sender pays regime
in the future. It would at least give an anti net neutrality
signal to the regulators at the national levels. </b></i><br>
<br>
In order to protect net neutrality, it is not enough for civil
society to oppose ETNO proposal. Everyone knows that without
regulation, net neutrality cannot survive. It will certainly be
violated. Market forces left to themselves will undoubtedly move
towards a non net neutral Internet. And therefore the only way to
save net neutrality is to get a global agreement on net neutrality
as an essential, or at least important, principle. ITRs,, and I
quote from the text of the existing ITRs,
<meta http-equiv="CONTENT-TYPE" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
<blockquote>
<p style="margin-top: 0.49cm; margin-bottom: 0cm">'establish
general
principles which relate to the provision and operation of
international telecommunication services'</p>
</blockquote>
<title></title>
<meta name="GENERATOR" content="LibreOffice 3.5 (Linux)">
<br>
Therefore, the ITRs is the right place to get net neutrality, as a
key principle of an egalitarian Internet, mentioned as a global
norm. Unfortunately, even the civil society did not fight for it -
so anxious it has been to keep 'the Internet out of the ITRs'. In
having done so they may have given up the case of global net
neutrality - something that was recently identified as a key cross
border Internet policy issue by an experts group of the Council of
Europe. <br>
<br>
We did suggest to the Indian delegation to insert pro net neutrality
language as below ( instead of the problematic text that is there at
present in the Indian position. )<br>
<br>
<meta http-equiv="CONTENT-TYPE" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
<p class="western" style="margin-left: 1.25cm; margin-bottom: 0cm" lang="en-US"><big>
<i><b><span style="background: transparent">Member States should
endeavour to take measures to ensure that there is no
discrimination
by network operators vis a vis different sources of
content, and the
principle of net neutrality, including in terms of global
inter-connections, is upheld as far as possible. </span></b></i>
</big></p>
<title></title>
<meta name="GENERATOR" content="LibreOffice 3.5 (Linux)">
<style type="text/css">
<!--
@page { margin: 2cm }
P { margin-bottom: 0.21cm; direction: ltr; color: #000000; widows: 0; orphans: 0 }
P.western { font-family: "Times New Roman", serif; font-size: 12pt; so-language: en-IN }
P.cjk { font-family: "Droid Sans Fallback"; font-size: 12pt; so-language: zh-CN }
P.ctl { font-family: "Lohit Hindi"; font-size: 12pt; so-language: hi-IN }
A:link { so-language: zxx }
-->
</style><br>
<br>
But without any support even from the civil society for such a
position we dont see much chance of this text getting in.<br>
<br>
<br>
parminder <br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<blockquote cite="mid:D2298F15-344A-4F26-8F91-C54F81A0007E@hserus.net" type="cite">
<div> and would support the multistakeholder model</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Now we have <a moz-do-not-send="true" href="http://news.dot-nxt.com/itu/wcit/ind/20/2">http://news.dot-nxt.com/itu/wcit/ind/20/2</a> ..
A single paragraph that seems to imply that one government
shouldn't ddos the other. </div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Sheesh.<br>
<br>
--srs (iPad)</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
</div></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><div><ITfC's Input for Indian position on ITRs.pdf></div></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><div><span>____________________________________________________________</span><br><span>You received this message as a subscriber on the list:</span><br><span> <a href="mailto:governance@lists.igcaucus.org">governance@lists.igcaucus.org</a></span><br><span>To be removed from the list, visit:</span><br><span> <a href="http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing">http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing</a></span><br><span></span><br><span>For all other list information and functions, see:</span><br><span> <a href="http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance">http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance</a></span><br><span>To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:</span><br><span> <a href="http://www.igcaucus.org/">http://www.igcaucus.org/</a></span><br><span></span><br><span>Translate this email: <a href="http://translate.google.com/translate_t">http://translate.google.com/translate_t</a></span><br></div></blockquote></body></html>